| Queen Archivist 26.10.2006 08:18 |
I have a question for Queenzoners... the intelligent ones anyway. It's a fair question, a reasonable point, so do try to address it with some thought and logic. Here goes... Queen toured the world from 1971 to 1986. 15 years as a touring band. They performed over 700 concerts. Hundreds of vinyl and cassette bootlegs existed in the 1970s, 80s, 90s - long before CDs and DVDs. NO book had ever been attempted, in all those years, to document the concert aspect of Queen's career. NO ONE had ever taken that area on because it was a huge and daunting task. There was NO internet. There was no way for people all over the world to gather concert information from thousands of fellow fans, about the concerts, nor to exchange masses of cross-reference data within minutes via email. People at that time wrote letters which took 6 or 8 weeks to cross the Atlantic. There simply did not exist the masses and masses of colossal data which we all have access to now, and take for granted. Many Moanzoners were not even born then, but they still feel they should comment about something they know nothing of. The available info today is VAST. In the 1990's it was pathetically tiny. Keep this in mind. Now then... in TWENTY FOUR YEARS, 1971 - 1995 (my book emerged in '95), any person in the world, in any country, could have written and submitted the Queen Live Concerts book. But nobody did. No one took it on because of the vastness of it. People talked about it. Fans wished such a thing existed, but it didn't, and still none of them took it on. Also... no one took it on because I guess they knew it would obviously contain unavoidable errors which would emerge and be recognised with the passing of time and the arrival of new information and technology... with the advent of the World Wide Web, not least. NONE OF YOU GUYS took it on. None of you did the research. None of you faced the vastness of the project. Too lazy? Not enough knowledge? Too scared of the critics? Probably a bit of each. You tell me the reason/s, if I'm mistaken above. So.... I took it on. I did the best job I could with the help of 200 fans accross the planet who sent me lists and photos and details and recollections and anecdotes. There was no chance of cross-referencing much of it. I knew that in time facts would emerge to disprove things, and they have. No big shock there - to me anyway! Now then, Queenzone critics.... a simple question for each of you (those who always criticise).... JUST ONE QUESTION TO ADDRESS HERE..... WHY DID YOU NOT WRITE THE BOOK? YOU ALONE, OR YOU WITH FRIEND/S?????? WHY? Why did you not take on the writing of the work which you now slag off? It's very simple. Like I say... Too lazy? Not enough knowledge? Too scared of the critics? What stopped you writing a vastly better book than me? I'm waiting. This should be good. I wonder if any one of you will have the balls to answer this seriously and openly. |
| Jan78 26.10.2006 08:25 |
Now that we indeed DO have the internet: link Well researched, reliable and from what I observed in the last few years, as correct as possible. When there are questions about concerts and venues, they are discussed and checked until the facts are as confirmed as possible, then they are put on the site. Sorry Martin, I'm sure you can speak for yourself, but I had to say this, as your website is about THE "product" I recommend when it's about Queen live. Especially when GB says something like NONE OF YOU HAS DONE THE EFFORT AND RESEARCH, because it's simply not true. Jan |
| Togg 26.10.2006 08:31 |
Ridiculous question, but here goes... Too busy working for a living in the media industry, which keeps me busy as many as 60 hours per week. Not enough knowledge of the subject matter and no desire to research it. I know what my skills are, and compiling a catalogue of dates in time is not one of them. Frankly it's boring, I would far rather right original material were I to choose to write something. I write music and write many many long and complex documents for work, that keeps me happy on the writing front so there is no need to write further when I get home. Why did you write it? |
| The Fairy King 26.10.2006 08:51 |
Togg wrote: Ridiculous question, but here goes... Too busy working for a living in the media industry, which keeps me busy as many as 60 hours per week. Not enough knowledge of the subject matter and no desire to research it. I know what my skills are, and compiling a catalogue of dates in time is not one of them. Frankly it's boring, I would far rather right original material were I to choose to write something. I write music and write many many long and complex documents for work, that keeps me happy on the writing front so there is no need to write further when I get home. Why did you write it?Can you believe this guy?? He has access to all the info he needs to make a decent book, but still can't manage to make one without mistakes. And on top he gets agitated when he gets criticism. If you just had done your job Greg right, there wouldn't be any moaning from our side. |
| Queen Archivist 26.10.2006 08:59 |
The Fairy King, you are a stupid person. TFK: Can you believe this guy?? He has access to all the info he needs to make a decent book, but still can't manage to make one without mistakes. ******* That's the WHOLE point, for God's sake. I did NOT have the access you describe. Read it again you fool. I had access only to 200 random sources that were not cross-referencable. I had NO WAY to do what can easily be done now. If you had a brain, you'd be dangerous pal. |
| Lester Burnham 26.10.2006 09:09 |
Greg, I don't think people are disputing the first edition of your live book, many of whom have admitted to liking. They are admitting that the second edition wasn't as good as it should have been, and that the errors that experts had handed to you weren't corrected. But you already stated that you didn't care about errors as long as you received a nice fat paycheck. Don't you have anything else you can be doing with your time instead of posting on a message board? Genuine question, no snarkiness intended. |
| Togg 26.10.2006 09:11 |
Greg the first book is not being questioned by folk, I think any that know anything about it realise it was done to the best it could have been at the time. The second on the other hand is somewhat questionable, like it or not a revised version should be much more accurate and if as you say the editor/publisher said there was no budget for a re-working of the layout than I think you should have found a way to raise that budget before re-printing. I understand it might have been difficult but that is what I would have done rather than publish something I know still to be floored. The people that are criticizing your first book I believe are doing so unfairly, they don't understand the effort or the time in which it was produced. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 26.10.2006 09:28 |
I almost hate to voice my opinion here, as I'd rather not get involved with some fueds that seem to be ongoing, but as I love debates and prize logic, I have to point something out. Queen Archivist, have you ever considered that possibly there are people out there working on it right now? I personally know of at least one, that I'm helping to edit, and I'm sure there are more out there. You yourself admited to the vast amount of information out there, so you can't honestly expect everyone to just sit down with the stuff in front of them and write a book. Even if the person had no other life, it would take at least a year. Plus, most of us here work for a living, have families and/or other responsiblities that limits the amount of time we can devote to such a project. Plus, don't fall into the fallacy that anywone who writes a book can get published. That is true to a certain extent with on demand publishing, which a collegue of mine has done, but that costs quite a bit of money which some people may not have. Barring that, there is the traditional route of shopping for a publisher who will take it, so for all you know there could be 50 new books out there that just haven't managed to get published yet. Just because none are out there on the shelves doesn't mean that none exist. Enjoy your position as top dog on that niche, because I'm not sure how long you'll be "competition-less" |
| The Fairy King 26.10.2006 09:39 |
Queen Archivist wrote: The Fairy King, you are a stupid person. TFK: Can you believe this guy?? He has access to all the info he needs to make a decent book, but still can't manage to make one without mistakes. ******* That's the WHOLE point, for God's sake. I did NOT have the access you describe. Read it again you fool. I had access only to 200 random sources that were not cross-referencable. I had NO WAY to do what can easily be done now. If you had a brain, you'd be dangerous pal.Running out of insults Greg? You're soo predictable. If you'd just concentrate on your job, rather than ranting and spewing crap over some peeps on a messageboard, maybe the goods would turn out ok. Shame you're such a cunt with a huge ego and nothing to show for it. I pity you. |
| Sebastian 26.10.2006 10:05 |
Can't anybody ban this tart? |
| FriedChicken 26.10.2006 10:13 |
Fairy King: I don't think Greg has access to all the information (Greg, please correct me if I'm wrong) to write a book without a single error. I doubt that Queen Productions have recordings, reviews or setlists from every single concert they ever played. So I guess Greg had to find his information in old newspapers, fanclub magazines, fans who saw a concert 20 years ago. And people who saw a concert 25 years ago, from a band which wasn't very well known in, lets say, 1972, can forget stuff. And may think they played Fairy Fellers Master Stroke live. I'm not defending Greg's behaviour on this forum, but I'm defending the amount of work he put in his books. I still think he did a great job. Queenconcerts might be good, but I also doubt it's 100% accurate |
| Queenman!! 26.10.2006 10:30 |
mmmm... Let me think Queen Archivist...Every day you make me think what was for a long time in my head. I think you let us all think you are Greg Brooks. But I doubt this is you for real. In the last few days you posted more mail then you did ever in all those years. Mainly your agressive way of talking and posting seems not correct for an adult who is reponsible for the archives of Queen. Referring to a earlier post of a QZ'ner... if Brian would read this.... the last word would not been said. Cheers! |
| Joma 26.10.2006 10:40 |
I don't understand what you are on about. You did write a book, but not only because you are a fine and nice person. You wrote it for your own sake and after all, for some money to rake in. Your book was good. But now we have more information and all everybody here wants is to have a compilation of the most possible and correct information. So we all want the same. Now everytime we want any information you say either nothing or "read my book". In some cases you obviously say wrong things ("there are no overdubs on LiveKillers"). You want everything from us and you give very very little. Whatever the cause for this may be, I don't know! But since we all want basically the same, we should stop bullying or insulting. That's should not be too hard. Be a gentleman! |
| MDNA 26.10.2006 11:12 |
I have followed this discussion for ages now and have refrained from giving an oppinion, but now I think is is time to do so. First of all I would like to say that I don't know the book or even held a copy in my hands. I'm not sure it has been published here in Portugal. Has it ? From what I read here people aren't angry at you, Greg, for writing the book in the first place. I fact most of the people, if not all, that criticise you also realise what an effort went into creating the first edition of the book, in a world with no Internet and collecting information spaning 5 continents and 15 years. Without knowing the book I can honestly say that whatever it contains was the best that could be achieved at that time. It contained errors simply because it was bound to happen. However, times change, and information is now more accessible and easyer to find, so when a second and revised edition of the book was announced, people naturly expected, that the errors, inconsistencies and/or omissions in the first edition that had been revealed and proven incorrect where corrected (much like any other work of this kind). Some where and some weren't. What realy pissed people of was the fact that you authorised and where willing to release a product that you knew for sure was flawed. If you where serious about releasing a good book you would have never allowed it released without being thurroughly revised. To me Queenconcerts.com is still the best resource concerning Queen live. Of course it probably has erros as well but at least Martin is making a continuous effort to slowly reduce these to a minimum. I seriously don't understand your attitude when posting here, and no doubt the quality of the posts in this site as degraded in recent years. and I can't say that you contributed anything to improve that cenario. You keep calling us "Moanzoners" but realy the person I seen moaning the most arroud here is you. You are saying that no-one wrote the book before you because whe where afraid of criticism? It seems like you are the one who doesn't accept criticism from nobody. I take pride in my work, and every day try to improve myself in some way. Maybe you should try it some time. |
| Queen Archivist 26.10.2006 11:17 |
Hey, The Fairy King - look at him getting all angry and abusive and hot under the collar..... TFK: Shame you're such a cunt with a huge ego and nothing to show for it. I pity you. Brainless inarticulate morons like you always resort to the c*** word when intelligent considered thought and reason abandons you. Calm down you silly boy. Don't wind up so easily. You give it out often enough, so learn to take it back a bit. Chill out. |
| Wiley 26.10.2006 11:24 |
Greg: The first edition of your book was GREAT. I have it and I like it a lot. The fact that it was made before Internet access was a popular way to interchange information makes it even better. I don't think anybody has got anything against your first edition. I haven't read the second one but I know many fans were excited about the idea of it being re-released and upgraded. The final result was considered to be pretty much the same and does not reflect the fact that you now are in a much better position to do your job better. Maybe the book was 10% better while it could have been a thousand times better (ok, I'm exagerating) if given the time, checking your sources more times, acquiring new sources, having full support from your publishers and doing your homework once again. Yes, it is a tough work and you did it over ten years ago. Maybe you think you deserve some slack for doing that very good first edition of your book (given the circumstances) but I understand the criticism is ONLY about your second edition and it should be treated separately. Some people don't like you and criticize your book based on what they think of you and that is not fair (yet, I don't think Barbara is one of these persons). But you have to admit that there are many good points and some constructive criticism and it is not only "Greg bashing", ok? |
| The Fake Greg Brooks 26.10.2006 12:25 |
Queen Archivist wrote: I have a question for Queenzoners... the intelligent ones anyway. WHY DID YOU NOT WRITE THE BOOK? YOU ALONE, OR YOU WITH FRIEND/S?????? WHY? Why did you not take on the writing of the work which you now slag off? It's very simple.Why? Because I like other bands as well, and wouldn't want to devote my research time to just one band. I think someone like Jesus Christ or Mother Teresa would be a much stronger subject to tackle. Because I have to pay the bills and writing a book about Queen really isn't going to make THAT much money, is it? I mean, I doubt you're driving a Ferrari. Because aiding disabled children around the world is much more rewarding. Are those 3 good enough reasons? Well, here's number 4: CAUSE I'M NOT A FRICKIN' NERD WHO LIVES IN MY PARENTS BASEMENT AND COULDN'T GET A COLLEGE DEGREE!!! |
| dsmeer 26.10.2006 16:39 |
What is the point, everybody makes mistakes and no-one , and also no book is perfect. So although there are some mistakes in the book it is still worth reading. So let's stop talking about the past and look at the future! There is 1 thing I must mention about someone (I think he was one of the contacts that helpt you with the book), he is not a good source , example look at his concert data. A lot of you will know who I m talking about, mentioned as a bad trader on some site. |
| Asterik 26.10.2006 17:01 |
It's such a shame that a member of Queen Productions could be reduced to this sort of behaviour on a fans website. You really do no favours at all for yourself Greg. What do you think you contribute by coming on this site and shouting in capital letters? What gain is there for you in receiving the hostility you receive,even if a fair proportion is deserved? Surely in a salaried, high voltage job such as yours there isn't even the time for this sort of nonsense? These questions aren't sarcastic I promise you, I'm genuinely baffled. Your rhetorical talents should be used elsewhere, Mr Brooks, in the research and book writing you do. |
| Asterik 26.10.2006 17:02 |
It's such a shame that a member of Queen Productions could be reduced to this sort of behaviour on a fans website. You really have no puropse at all, Greg. What do you think you contribute my coming on this site and shouting claptrap in capital letters? What gain is there in receiving the hostility you receive,even if a fair proportion is deserved in many's view? Surely in a salaried, high voltage job such as yours there isn'teven the time for this sort of nonsense? |
| Penetration_Guru 26.10.2006 18:36 |
At the risk of being seen as needlessly argumentative and petty, my answer could be... "Because I always knew that if I did so it would automatically be incomplete and inaccurate" However, to be more honest... I did (sort of) write a book. I still have a folder with my notes on each of the bootleg tapes I acquired - dates, tracklists & timings. Also included is a page for each released group or solo album with similar notes and details of how many live performances are on the aforementioned tapes. Finally there is a list of all alternate versions in order of release, with track timings and a note of which were available on CD. My own personal Queen archive. But it never occurred to me to make a proper book. Firstly I would have assumed that others would have had more/better stuff (and thanks to the internet I have been proved right 1000 times), and secondly it was only for my own benefit anyway. I'm a self-centred nerd... I did, however, write two pieces intended for Record Collector articles, which I only now remember. One was on solo work which was supplanted by the last good article they produced on the band (the advertorial for Freddie's 60th doesn't count), the other for a subject that they haven't actually covered yet. Hmmm.... Why was neither submitted? They were handwritten, which I instinctively felt would be an unattractive format, but that's probably an excuse (although true). What is true is that I lacked the confidence to submit it. Maybe I should re-try now I am buoyed by technology... |
| radio_what's_new 26.10.2006 23:48 |
Queen Archivist wrote: I have a question for Queenzoners... the intelligent ones anyway. hat area on because it was a huge and daunting task. Too lazy? Not enough knowledge? Too scared of the critics? Probably a bit of each. You tell me the reason/s, if I'm mistaken above. What stopped you writing a vastly better book than me?Dear Greg, I did not write a book about Queen because it's childish. For me Queen is a hobby. I am a fulltime law student and I do want a REAL carreer. That's why I don't waste my time on writing a Queen book, I rather work on my thesis for university. I think if you went to college you would understand. regards |
| Rick 27.10.2006 05:14 |
Oh dear, sweet Greggieboy, my darling, sugarlips, little pumpkin of mine. Writing such a book and then go through the same shit as you? Merci beaucoup. I pass. |
| Micrówave 27.10.2006 12:48 |
Somewhere, in all this mind-boggling rant, lies the secrets of Queen. I just haven't been able to find them yet. And I only write cookbooks. |